On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 16:14 +0100, Jonathan Underwood wrote: > On 17/05/07, Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Thursday 17 May 2007 07:55:18 Josh Boyer wrote: > > > Ah. I'll try and bug DaveJ about it as we get closer and send (or have > > > him send) something out once it's know. > > > > This is yet another reason why external kmods are such crap piles. Often > > times the kernel is the very last package to build, and when we "know" that > > it is good, is when we actually do the spins. We don't always have time to > > wait for N kernel mods to rebuild against it and get tagged. When the kmods > > were in a separate repo this was less of an issue, but now that everything is > > in the same repo it is far far more important of an issue and one that will > > hound us quite often, like with every kernel update. > > /me resists the urge to ask why Fedora doesn't move to using dkms for > kernel modules. Yes, I know, Fedora is primarily a binary > distribution. The packaging of kernel modules that Mathias has been > doing for freshrpms with dkms is living testament to the ease of that > approach though. Oh dear, I didn't resist the urge. Because we will not assume our end users have full toolchains and kernel devel environments simply to get a driver installed. ~spot -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
